By No consensus on city vote change planPublished April 2nd 2009 in Herald Sun

DURHAM -- Experts united in their dislike for the Durham County Board of
Elections' proposal that the city elect its leaders through plurality
votes nonetheless couldn't agree Wednesday on whether it should instead
try a novel "instant runoff" system.

The chief drawback of such a system -- first tested in this state in 2007
by Cary and Hendersonville -- is that while it might work in this year's
upcoming ward-based City Council election, it could cause problems in
2011 when the council seats up for grabs will be elected at large, Duke
University professor Donald Horowitz said.

In elections like that, "it seems perfectly possible [for instant
runoffs] to produce strange results," Horowitz told the 20 or so
people who attended a League of Women Voters forum on the city's election
system.

But advocates said instant runoffs -- which ask voters to indicate their
second- and third-choice candidates, which come into play if no one wins
an outright majority of first-choice ballots -- can produce more
legitimate results than a plurality system while also helping communities
avoid the costs of running two elections in a cycle like the city does
now.

"Plurality would be the worst possible scenario," said Torrey
Dixon, executive director of FairVote North Carolina, a group that
supports the instant-runoff ballot. "It gives the possibility that a
candidate detested by the overwhelming majority of voters can win."

Wednesday's forum came as the City Council prepares for a public hearing
next Monday on the elections board's proposal that it do away with the
primary the city holds in October every odd-numbered year to winnow the
field of council and mayoral candidates.

The board and its director, Mike Ashe, say eliminating the primary and
instituting election by plurality would save the city about $170,000
every election cycle.

The October primary is also a low-turnout affair, usually drawing only 11
to 15 percent of the city's registered voters to the polls, said Judie
Burke, president of the League of Women Voters of North Carolina. The
general election that follows it in November always draws better.

Few who spoke in Wednesday's forum signaled any favor for the plurality
system. Its main drawback, as Dixon said, is that in fields with three or
more candidates, the winner doesn't necessarily need 50 percent of the
vote.

But Horowitz and others noted that instant-runoff elections can also
yield plurality winners. Such an outcome is possible in situations where
there are more than three candidates, or if a significant number of
voters hold back some of their potential choices.

The council's upcoming hearing could set up a May 4 vote on whether to
change the election system. One member who attended Wednesday's forum,
Councilman Howard Clement, said he's already being lobbied by local
activists.

"I'm getting a lot of calls from people telling me what I better
do," he said, indicating in answer to a question that they're coming
from "people representing" the leaders of the Durham Committee
on the Affairs of Black People.